Connecticut Repub. Arrested for Grabbing a Woman's Genitals

Whether it was front, back or kind of on the side, the point is he grabbed her naughty spot. Even his own lawyer isn't denying that. They are trying to play it off, whatever it was, as a "friendly gesture."

A pinch on the butt (an old outdated classic) is not the same as a pussy grab (something only a Billionaire could get away with)
 
TS lied to conflate this assault with Trump. We're geting on his ass (or "pussy" as he would call it) for the intentional misrepresentation. No one here is siding with the "gentleman" from Connecticut.

I didn't lie, clown, READ:

"Keyserling reportedly reached from behind, placed his hand between her legs and pinched on or near her genital area [...] After reviewing a survelliance video of the incident police determined that its contents were consistent with the woman's claims."
http://deadstate.org/i-no-longer-ha...d-after-grabbing-a-woman-in-her-genital-area/

You want to believe that it was a pat on the butt check (which would still be wrong) but that is not what the victim is describing and alleging.

If you want to disbelieve the victim and instead, take the word of the old sleaze bucket, that is on you, but stop saying that I am inventing the details of the story.

You say I can't tell and ass from a pussy. I have to admit, it's hard to tell sometimes. I mean look at you, you are both an ass AND pussy. Confusing.
 
Last edited:
From HamPham, the VERY FIRST poster to respond to your thread:
http://www.greenwichtime.com/police...-RTM-member-arrested-on-criminal-10852811.php

"The encounter continued in the office, and when the woman rose to leave, she was pinched on her rear end by von Keyserling, according to the affidavit."

She later told investigators she detected “an evil look in his eyes” when they had a brief verbal exchange as she was leaving the office.

The woman reported the incident to the administration at the Witherell. On Dec. 16, she decided to pursue the matter with police.

Police reviewed videotape of the office. According to the affidavit, it was unclear where von Keyserling’s hand was when the woman walked past him.

The sequence of events documented on the video was consistent with the woman’s account, according to court papers, and she was seen pointing a finger at von Keyserling in a disapproving, agitated manner on the video."



I want to see a picture of her asspussy.

Sooooo...
 
From HamPham, the VERY FIRST poster to respond to your thread:

Sooooo...
Yes, rear end is a vague fucking term, asshat. If you had actually read the links before accusing me of making shit up, you would seen the more descriptive accounts.
 
Lmfao these right alt baboons think they are trump.

Gonna chill in that palace and have a steady stream of piss.......my friend, this will be piss for everybody. It will be YUGE.

The common person can get pissed on as well. For a fee the brown can get down but prices must be agreed upon before said meeting.
 
"I don't have to be politically correct anymore. It will be your word against mine, and no one will believe you,"

Sorry_Brother_7.jpg
 
The perp says he grabbed ass. The victim says he grabbed puss. The video is a shitty surveillance camera and all you can tell for sure is that he definitely grabbed.

How does this equate to me making shit up to link this to Trump?
The fact that you were so ardent about it being pussy when it was more likely ass. You knew what you were doing.
 
he just wanted to Connecticunt & practice Cuntettiquette.
 
The fact that you were so ardent about it being pussy when it was more likely ass. You knew what you were doing.
More likely according to WHO? The victim unequivocally said it was her genitals. Once again, if you want to believe the perp. that's on you, but I did not make up or unfairly present the victim's allegations.

Once again, video shows she was grabbed. Victim says it was her genitals. Perp says it was not. You want to believe the perp. and disbelieve the victim, that's on you.
 
Last edited:
More likely according to WHO? The victim unequivocally said it was her genitals. Once again, if you want to believe the perp. that's on you, but I did not make up or unfairly present the victim's allegations.


Once again, video shows she was grabbed. Victim says it was her genitals. Perp says it was not. You want to believe the perp. and disbelieve the victim, that's on you.

Where does it say that it shows she was grabbed on the video?
 
Where does it say that it shows she was grabbed on the video?

“Police said surveillance recordings from the day of the incident are consistent with the woman’s claims.”

https://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/co...als-his-lawyer-says-it-was-a-playful-gesture/


“After reviewing a surveillance video of the incident, police determined that its contents were consistent with the woman’s claims.”

http://deadstate.org/i-no-longer-ha...d-after-grabbing-a-woman-in-her-genital-area/


The police who have SEEN the video say that it matches with the victim’s story, but SherBro’s be like, “Naught-aw, no way man, liberal conspiracy, fake news, #maga.”
 
Last edited:
No answer @HamPhan? @Rematch?

Not only were you both wrong on the facts, you brilliantly, albeit unwittingly, displayed the biased thinking that is the reason so many victims of sexual assault are afraid to report the crimes against them.

I guess I'm just a "liberal cuck" while you two are "real men."
 
Haven't read it, but the point they're making is the police say the video shows him grabbing her. Doesn't say where. One is worse than the other
 
Back
Top